backtop


Print 34 comment(s) - last by King of Heroes.. on Dec 23 at 9:48 PM

One ISP owner says if the RIAA wants his help, it better bring a checkbook

Most people are aware of the prolonged legal campaign that the RIAA has waged against alleged music sharers. The RIAA has filed suit against people with little proof, often seeking to do nothing more than scare the person into paying the high fees that RIAA demands for copyright infringement.

DailyTech reported last week that the RIAA announced it would end its legal campaign against suspected illegal file sharers and would instead work with ISPs to combat illegal file sharers. Some ISP owners say that this new plan will put the cost of battling music sharers on the ISP rather than the RIAA or the copyright owner.

One ISP owner named Jerry Scroggin says that if the RIAA or Hollywood wants the ISP to enforce copyright law, that Hollywood or the RIAA should foot the bill. Scroggin owns a small ISP called Bayou Internet and Communications and counts about 10,000 customers.

CNET News reports that Scroggin says if the RIAA asks his ISP to help it combat pirates, that it had better bring the checkbook and leave legal threats at home. According to Scroggin, he receives several notices each month that he needs to remove file sharers from his network and sends the same thing in reply.

Scroggin says, "I ask for their billing address. Usually, I never hear back."

It costs a lot of money for an ISP to track down customers that the RIAA says are illegally sharing files and the ISP is expected to do the footwork for the RIAA free of charge. Scroggin continues, "They have the right to protect their songs or music or pictures. But they don't have the right to tell me I have to be the one protecting it. I don't want anyone doing anything illegal on my network, but we don't work for free."

The ISP power says that he has a long history of helping law enforcement and isn’t trying to be a "hard ass" but the realities of finding alleged file shares and proving that they are actually breaking the law are very hard to accomplish. He says that there is often very little or no proof that the customers allegedly sharing files have done anything illegal.

To simply cut the users off at the request of the RIAA or Hollywood could cost him as much as $1,440 over the contract term of a subscription plan. Scroggin also says that the letters that are sent are often legally threatening to him, when he is doing nothing to affect the business of the company allegedly seeing their copyright violated. There's got to be a better way than HBO sending me threatening e-mail," he said. "What I'm saying is, let's sit at the table and come up with a way that works for everyone, including the customers."

Scroggin highlights what is likely to be the RIAAs biggest challenge in gaining the assistance of ISPs to combat pirates -- the cost of doing business. Add to that the bad blood between ISPs and entertainment companies stemming from years of legal threats and RIAAs new plan to stop pirates may be no more effective than its original plan of suing everyone.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Well what do you know...
By MrPoletski on 12/23/2008 9:02:36 AM , Rating: 2
not to mention that if the music industry were to get off their behinds and fully embrace + push high quality audio formats such as super audio CD and DVD audio then people will really be missing something when they only get the mp3.

For the record, CD is PCM 44Khz 16 bit, DVD audio is also PCM up to 192Khz 32bit but usually only 96Khz 24bit, SACD is 2.88Mhz direct stream digital but it's a tough call on quality between it and DVD audio.

MP3 at 128Kbps is an 11-1 compression of CD quality and mp3 compression usually comes with a low pass filter at around 16Khz. Sure you need decent audio kit to hear the difference properly but if they pushed the format then I'm sure we'd see this decent audio kit dropping in price significantly.

I will still never understand why the industry didn't jump on SACD with a vengence... there are no SACD burners in existance (for the end user) and capturing the DSD bitstream then converting it to something usable is a PITA and requires specialist equipment - either that or plug your line out into your line it for real quality reduction. Hello piracy? or rather, bye bye piracy. Yeah the songs will get distributed but they will be defacto lower quality as apposed to the situation right now, where you can easily download FLAC's of any album you want and eveneasier get high bitrate mp3's made from the original recording.

You see, even if SACD totally replaced CD 1 for 1, there would still be no SACD burners because the PC, the driver of optical storage mediums, is well into its DVD and blu ray that offer much higher data capacities than the built-for-purpose format SACD.

Give me all my music in HD audio! for the love of my ears!

/rant


RE: Well what do you know...
By King of Heroes on 12/23/2008 9:48:43 PM , Rating: 2
I agree.

I find it very, very odd that the music industry is STILL using CDs for physical distribution. SACD I can understand, since its not really widespread. But why the heck HAVEN'T they at least moved to DVD yet? DVD is very widespread, you're not going to get a mass panic of people without DVD players. Everyone (or at least most people) have one or they can buy one for cheap. The only drawback I guess is the lack of portable DVD players maybe?

SACD does sound interesting, especially the physical copy protections it implements.


"Death Is Very Likely The Single Best Invention Of Life" -- Steve Jobs

Related Articles
RIAA Calls an End to Lawsuit Crusade
December 19, 2008, 11:19 AM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki